vechainstats_get_historic_balance

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the operation but does not reveal the return format, whether both VET and VTHO are returned as separate fields, error handling for invalid dates or blocks, or the relationship between date and blocknum when both are provided. This lack of context is a significant gap.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single concise sentence that directly states the tool's purpose without any redundant or extraneous information. It is efficiently front-loaded and easy to parse.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

The tool is relatively simple, but since there is no output schema and no annotations, the description should provide more context about the response structure and edge cases. It covers the core operation but lacks details on what the returned balance looks like, units, and behavior if no date or blocknum is specified. This makes it minimally adequate but not fully complete.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema descriptions cover all three parameters, providing a baseline of 3. The description adds meaning by indicating that 'date' and 'blocknum' are alternative ways to specify the historical point ('at a specific date or block'), and that the balance pertains to both VET and VTHO, which is not evident from the parameters alone.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description uses a specific verb 'Get' and clearly identifies the resource as 'historical VET/VTHO balance' with the scope 'at a specific date or block'. This distinguishes the tool from current balance tools like vechainstats_get_account_info or token-specific tools like vechainstats_get_vip180_balance.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention that this is for historical balances as opposed to current balances, nor does it reference any sibling tools or exclusions. The agent is left to infer usage solely from the tool name.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.